Logical reasoning PrepTest 120 · Section 4 · Question 3

Incorrect. There's nothing strong enough in the stimulus to suggest what those who want to become great author's "should" do. This answer is trying to get you to think that great authors innovate, and so copying them would preclude someone from being a great author. However, that's something that great writers only "often" do.

Incorrect. "Risk" doesn't line up with the stimulus, as the Professor attributes idiosyncratic language usage as a good thing.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Best language users = Great authors
Great authors use language innovatively/idiosyncratically
Great authors are less respectful towards proper use than most of us

Answer Anticipation:
The stimulus in this Must Be True question has a few elements that we should focus on as we anticipate an answer and ultimately settle on one. We've highlighted them in bold in our Summary—you should start to "highlight" these and similar words in your head as you read through a stimulus so that you can also anticipate correct answers.

Here, the argument starts with a superlative, talking about the best users of language. That allows a comparison to everyone else—no one can use language better than great authors. That's potentially going to lead to an inference.

After that, we get what these authors "often" do, which doesn't carry much logical force and is unlikely to tie into the correct answer. However, the last line is both comparative ("less" respectful) and talks about "most" people, so we may get an answer that relies on that.

In short, we should focus here on the comparisons and statements with some logical force behind them, and find an answer reflecting those statements.

Answer Explanation:
This answer brings in all of the elements we identified! Great authors are the "best users" of language, so they're the most talented ones discussed in this answer. And we know that they're less respectful towards proper usage than most other people. Put those statements together, and you get this answer, so it's correct.

Key Takeaway:
There's a pattern to what types of statements lead to correct answers in Must Be True questions, and this pattern relates to the underlying rules of logic—in other words, the LSAT can't wholesale break them. As such, starting to note what types of statements lead to correct answers can increase your ability to anticipate correct answers. Here, a focus on strong and comparative language helped us anticipate correctly.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of great writers receiving criticism for their writing style, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of who should set the rules for proper language usage, so this answer is out of scope.